Useless fuckers cries more than my newborn.
post
... they could face federal anti-racketeering charges that were designed to bust up organized crime.
Not even the Onion could come up with something this bat-shit silly.
It's now a crime for hurting baby Donnie's feelings. Oh, poor baby Donnie. Do you need a lollipop baby boy?
"I mean, they were just shouting, basically, in his vicinity,” she said.
“Repeat what you just said. I mean, honestly. So you’re asking whether there was damage done by four individuals screaming and yelling at the president of our United States while he’s trying to have dinner. That can’t be a serious question,” Blanche fired back.
Jesus Christ...
“Repeat what you just said. I mean, honestly. So you’re asking whether there was damage done by four individuals screaming and yelling at the president of our United States while he’s trying to have dinner. That can’t be a serious question,” Blanche fired back
On first reading, I legitimately thought this was driving home the point that no legally actionable harm was done but no, she he (oops) is actually saying their sock-puppet's fee-fees might have been hurt? Massive LOL
To be fair, she's right that asking her to defend her 🤡 position can't be a serious question.
Turns out they WILL let him get away with a shooting on 5th Ave in broad daylight. He shot the social contract right in the face 🤷
Deteriorating old man spews word salad when his night goes slightly off-script
He's pathetic
How ANYONE thinks he's any sort of leader is beyond me
Oh it's real simple. They go in through your nose . . . and they let you keep the piece of brain they take out.
Well obviously that's a metaphor. The answer used to be Fox News, now it's some unholy conglomeration of podcasts and YuKKKTube channels along with Fox News.
Yeah yeah, release the Epstein files.
I love how the free speech guys support all of this
Lets see if they can get a grand jury to indict them. They’ve gotten a bunch of no bills already so one more will be fitting.
"Could" face RICO charges but WILL not. Because nothing the protesters did was a violation of any part of the RICO act.
Sadly what I've seen from the judicial system whenever trump starts to throw laws around hasn't been a stellar response, so while I'd like to have full faith in said system, I don't.
True. But Rico sounds scary since it’s always used against gangs and the mob. So they will keep saying it to make it sound scary
And it gives their followers something to latch onto, and repeat over and over. It gets traction with their own people. If you were to ask them how their protesting is a RICO issue, they'll go blank.
It's like back when a few podcasters talked about FISA warrants for a few minutes, and suddenly every MAGA thought they had doctorate level expertise on FISA warrants. Now they like to randomly toss that buzzword into a discussion, and get all arrogant when you don't instantly understand the connection to FISA warrants, because it isn't relevant at all.
Greenpeace just got hit with a bogus private Rico lawsuit in North Dakota brought by the oil companies. They did all of these mailers as well to all the perspective jurors.
The DOJ is controlled by Trump. The Supreme Court majority is corrupt. At the federal level, there is no law, only arbitrary use of force, backed by bullshit excuses.
America is dead. Welcome to the new shit show.
I believe the US is fully illegitimate now. POTUS doesn't follow the constitution. Congress passes unconstitutional laws. SCOTUS wipes its ass with the constitution.
Of course it is. Most people however still haven't figured that out
We're still in a pre-collapse period where people still think the stock market represents the economy and that stocks aren't incredibly overvalued.
Once there is mass starvation from hyperinflation, I suspect people will figure out something's wrong.
The real question is once people come to terms with it.... what will be done?
You're looking at it. You all know.
It took millions of deaths and the largest military mobilization in the history of the world to stop Hitler.
The United States is exponentially more powerful than Nazi Germany.
Everyone needs to do the math as it's now time to decide whether fight, flee or comply is going to be your family's plan.
Everyone needs to at least be using VPNs, seeding torrents for important information and media, and using decentralized and open source software as much as possible.
It's been so for a while, it just now started stinking...
MAGAs Alpha Male everyone 🤣
What a completely stupid waste of resources and degradation of the meaning of law & justice. If the words and application are made up, the whole thing loses meaning. Never mind a sane prosecutor knowing there’s little chance in court.
People called you a shitty name. Aren’t you supposed to “be a man” and just get over it? Isn’t this just snowflake behavior? /s
Trump is (and has always been) “Mr. waste of resources and degradation of the meaning of law & justice.”
If the words and application are made up, the whole thing loses meaning
Almost as if that's the intention...
The point is to waste the other persons resources. Even if / when it's dismissed it may bankrupt them.
Well good thing we have a Constitution to protect us, right everyone? I think we should all be making sure we have hard copies for the future or it too will be destroyed like Wikipedia probably will be.
Fun fact: Some dictatorships also have constitutions "guaranteeing" freedom of speech.
https://english.www.gov.cn/archive/lawsregulations/201911/20/content_WS5ed8856ec6d0b3f0e9499913.htm
Article 35 Citizens of the People’s Republic of China shall enjoy freedom of speech, the press, assembly, association, procession and demonstration.
This is America right now.
小狗狗乖乖听话,告诉你的主人习总去吃屎。
Lmao 10 hours account trying to lecture me. Guess what, fuck the one child policy, they tried to terminate me but failed LOL, I'm still alive, can't even enforce your beloved authoritarian policies. Me being alive is pissing like on the CCP's emblem.
My direct experience is not a "liberal pill" LOL.
Sure go ahead and make more spam with your 10 hour account. Its the "Antiyanks" again 🤣
Just remember the 2nd Amendment. That exists for when all the other Amendments fail.
The Confederates never, ever gave a fuck about the law, freedom, the Constitution. They don't even give a fuck about things like the 2nd amendment.
At the beginning of the term Pam Bondi is in a televised meeting with the president talking about taking away peoples' guns that have been accused of crimes in state courts, then if the person gets a not guilty charge, for the feds to give the guns back if they want to, to keep them if they don't want to.
So you get accused, the cops come along take all of your guns, leaving you at the mercy of everybody with guns before you have been convicted of anything. It is more than a slippery slope this is over the fucking edge of the government trying to ursurp the rights of Americans and turn us into slaves.
"says"? It's a threat. The president is threatening protesters who exercised their 1st amendment.
He recently said George Soros should face RICO charges, this is the obvious continuation of that thought.
Oh my God, the amount of Idiocracy is off the charts with this bullshit.
Reminder that Idiocracy had a good President.
President Camacho was made aware of a major issue and he found the smartest man on earth to fix it.
Camacho was unironically a much, much better president
Dude is so used to being scared of that acronym he’s throwing it at eveyone he doesn't like?
That sounds harder to get a grand jury to agree to move forward with charges on than a ham sandwich.
Grand Juries are actively practicing jury Nullification. Take for example the protester who literally threw a sandwich and hit a cop. It's on video. He threw it, it hit a cop, it was technically assault on a police officer. The DC grand jury nullified it, they could not get 12 votes.
This has happened over 9 times since Trumps "crime fighting surge" started. They are not enforcing his evil.
No, it's because more jurors are vegan, and want to liberate the ham sandwiches, and the others are hungry, and keep eating the defendants.
He threw it, it hit a cop, it was technically assault on a police officer.
Technically, throwing a grain of rice at someone is also an assault. That's where common sense comes into play.
Grand juries are part of the system in order to make sure that bullshit charges like that don't make it to court. And yes, I'm also aware that prosecutors know how to game the system to get indictments. But the grand jusy system still serves as a sometimes-reliable 2-inch crap filter.
What do you mean?
What did they say?
“Is it sheer happenstance that individuals show up at a restaurant where the president is trying to enjoy dinner in Washington, D.C., and accost him with vile words and vile anger?” Blanche asked CNN host Kaitlan Collins.
How nice that he can afford to go out to eat at a restaurant.
I'm sure I know the answer, but does anyone who knows RICO better than me explain how the fuck that charge would apply?
Their argument will likely be that a protest is an organized event, so if protestors commit crimes that's organized crime.
It's a bullshit argument, of course, but that's never stopped them before.
It doesn't, but that no longer matters. Fascism is all about turning the legal system into a game of Fizzbin played against political enemies.
Good luck making it stick.
They don't even need to make it stick. Just being arrested for something like this can ruin a person's life, and the legal bills could be financially ruinous.
It won't get that far. DC grand juries are refusing to indict for these trumped up charges.
"Have you ever been arrested for a felony?"
Never seen a job application with that on it. "Have you ever been convicted of a felony?" Sure, but never what you said.
Here is a lawyer who says that it's one of their most common cases, employers who ask if somebody has been arrested at a job interview.
https://www.reaveslegal.com/faqs/-have-you-ever-been-arrested-.cfm
It apparently varies from state to state if, and when, they can ask that question. It's also worth pointing out that any lawyer worth their salt (like the lawyers who work on behalf of the ACLU) would take steps to see that record erased or limited in how it can be used.
And unless you are completely desperate, why would you work for someone who looks down on you for being arrested for standing up to fascists? Being arrested for that is a badge of honor.
By the way, Trevita17, I can see that you downvoted my other comment. Did you do this in retaliation, thinking that I had downvoted your comment? I didn't, and you can see that with this link, which is the same service I used to see your downvote. I don't approve of using downvotes like this. Comment downvotes should be reserved for trolls, spam, and serious misinformation.
Why would your approval factor into my behavior at all? I'll remove the downvote, but get your ego in check.
I was hoping to get buy in about the uses of downvotes.
I think that if people know that comment downvotes are public information and if they agree on the proper use of downvotes, we will be able to identify bad actors.
On the other hand, if people believe incorrectly comment downvotes have been unethically used against them, then anybody, even me, may let their demons get the better of them, and vote in revenge. So it's very important for people to know it's public information.
Fake internet points are not worth this much deliberation. There are so many actual problems in this world you could be worried about, and you've chosen this. Make a different choice, a more impactful choice. You clearly have a good head on your shoulders, if a bit swollen. You should put it to good use.
From my perspective, comment votes are simply information, the same as comment contents.
And I think bad faith downvotes interfere with conversations more than bad faith comments do. I don't do this, but I am convinced that people see a downvote and will immediately think worse of a comment. One downvote leads to more, and it often doesn't matter what the contents of the comment are.
I am glad that you are so complimentary towards me, despite disagreeing with my behavior. That demonstrates character in itself. All I can say to defend myself is to say that as long as I'm using this website, I'll feel motivation to improve the discourse. I just have my own ideas about what that entails.
Still, an employer might have two applicants who they otherwise have a hard time selecting between, but one has been arrested and one hasn't. They will probably choose the one who hasn't been arrested. I would say that's the bias against somebody who has been arrested is the whole point of asking the question.
Why not charge them with dancing with a mailman too, and hey, I think one of their taillights is out.

top 100 comments